Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

National 2nd Amend. Political & Legal Discussion Discuss national gun rights and 2A related political topics here. All advice given is NOT legal counsel.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-18-2022, 8:51 PM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 43,448
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default OR FIREARMS FED suit against OR mag ban (Measure 114) Pre injunctions denied 12-6-22

RECAP link to complaint https://t.co/wyupagv4VA

Quote:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF OREGON
PENDLETON DIVISION

OREGON FIREARMS FEDERATION,
INC. an Oregon public benefit corporation;
BRAD LOHREY, SHERMAN COUNTY
SHERIFF; and ADAM JOHNSON, an
individual,
Plaintiffs,
v.
KATE BROWN, GOVERNOR OF THE
STATE OF OREGON, in her official
capacity; and ELLEN ROSENBLUM,
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE
OF OREGON, in her official capacity,
Defendants.
Compare to the original Duncan complaint, http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/..._Complaint.pdf
__________________
When a Long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, Pursuing Invariably the Same Object, Evinces a Design to Reduce Them [I.E. the People] Under Absolute Despotism, It Is Their Right, It Is Their Duty, to Throw off Such Government, and to Provide New Guards for Their Future Security.”
– Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

- Marcus Aurelius
Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.”

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.




Last edited by Librarian; 11-25-2022 at 10:51 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-18-2022, 9:52 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 3,474
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
RECAP link to complaint https://t.co/wyupagv4VA

Compare to the original Duncan complaint, http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/..._Complaint.pdf
As usual, you are on top of events. Question, I wonder if they would allow me, as an Idaho resident, to become a plaintiff given that I have an Oregon CHL and my carry guns have magazines that exceed 10 rounds in capacity and Oregon is now infringing on my right to travel with my lawfully possessed and legally carried firearms based solely on the capacity of the magazines these firearms came with.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-19-2022, 12:03 AM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 9,742
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Question

What about the "OTHER PROVISIONS" aka "INFRINGEMENTS" included in 114?

Are civil rights orgs there going to just nibble around the edges of this Crap Pie?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-19-2022, 8:28 AM
Aragorn's Avatar
Aragorn Aragorn is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 314
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Yes, absolutely the ENTIRE measure needs to be challenged !!

This ‘piecemeal’ approach is insanity.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-19-2022, 8:48 AM
9Cal_OC's Avatar
9Cal_OC 9Cal_OC is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: OC
Posts: 4,983
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aragorn View Post
Yes, absolutely the ENTIRE measure needs to be challenged !!

This ‘piecemeal’ approach is insanity.
Well lawyers need job security right?

Also, if the entire measure is challenged and the courts agree with the state, I doubt they’d piecemeal what stays and what should go.
__________________
Freedom isn't free...

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-19-2022, 9:48 AM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 4,099
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Hunters Fear 'End Of Firearm Sales' Until Oregon Creates Gun Permit System

I know this has been touched on in other threads related to Oregon's Measure 114, but I thought it worthy of it's own thread.

Hunters fear 'end of firearm sales' until Oregon creates gun permit system

Quote:
Gun rights advocates fear all firearm sales will freeze in Oregon in three weeks when one of the nation's strictest gun control measures takes effect.

Measure 114, which voters appear to have been passed by a 1.5% margin, bans ammunition magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds and mandates the creation of a permit-to-purchase system that includes hands-on firearm training...

Oregon State Police announced this week that Measure 114 will take effect Dec. 8.

Fox News asked OSP in an email whether firearm purchases will halt on that date if a permit processing system is not yet in place. A spokesperson for the agency said only that "OSP is working diligently to ensure that the new Permit to Purchase program will be operational by December 8, 2022."...

Patrick said gun stores are preparing for the worst-case scenario, telling customers they may have to stop selling firearms next month.

"That also means that Oregonians cannot go out of state to purchase firearms either," Patrick said. "We're basically being held hostage by 114 because firearms dealers have to respect the laws of a person's home state."...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-19-2022, 9:50 AM
Gavelek's Avatar
Gavelek Gavelek is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,311
iTrader: 99 / 99%
Default

You voted you got it
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-19-2022, 9:54 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 43,448
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavelek View Post
You voted you got it
Portland voted, 959K to 930K, assisted by the usual pack of lies and refusal of TV to accept opposition ads.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-19-2022, 9:56 AM
Striker62's Avatar
Striker62 Striker62 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Stanislaus County
Posts: 81
iTrader: 15 / 100%
Default

Some 36 countries voted opposed and only 6 countries for this. Sadly those 6 most populous countries (Portland being one of them) decided the fate of the entire state. That’s F’d up
__________________
With time.. you can buy most anything, but you cannot buy time. Cherish the time you have with family and friends and your time on this earth.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-19-2022, 10:02 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 43,448
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pacrat View Post
What about the "OTHER PROVISIONS" aka "INFRINGEMENTS" included in 114?

Are civil rights orgs there going to just nibble around the edges of this Crap Pie?
It seems that the permit to purchase provisions cannot go into effect until a bunch of infrastructure is in place, and that cannot happen until the legislature appropriates money for that stuff.

If one cannot actually comply, one cannot rationally (sorry, I do remember this is gun law) be prosecuted for non-compliance, so there is no one who has standing, right?

Besides that, 'official' notice that it passed was Thursday the 17th. Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-20-2022, 3:23 AM
press1280 press1280 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: WV
Posts: 2,951
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Aside from the obvious 2A, the legislature also screwed up by not even having a grandfather clause?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-20-2022, 9:30 AM
tedw tedw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 93
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Kudos to:

OREGON FIREARMS FEDERATION,
INC. an Oregon public benefit corporation;
BRAD LOHREY, SHERMAN COUNTY
SHERIFF; and ADAM JOHNSON, an
individual,
Plaintiffs,
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-20-2022, 10:12 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 43,448
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
Aside from the obvious 2A, the legislature also screwed up by not even having a grandfather clause?
114 is not a product of the Legislature, but rather Giffords and Bloomberg's groups. The Portland LEVO sponsors are just fig-leaves.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-20-2022, 11:57 AM
Dan_Eastvale's Avatar
Dan_Eastvale Dan_Eastvale is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 6,119
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by press1280 View Post
Aside from the obvious 2A, the legislature also screwed up by not even having a grandfather clause?
I think the current US AWB awaiting a Senate vote doesn’t have the grandfather clause either

So we’re all screwed
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-20-2022, 5:03 PM
pacrat pacrat is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Socialist Republic of SoCal
Posts: 9,742
iTrader: 11 / 100%
Thumbs up

Apparently a Cnty Sheriff is onboard with this suit against 114.

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics...TLAND%2C%20Ore.

Quote:
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — An Oregon gun rights group and a county sheriff have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a voter-approved ballot measure that is one of the strictest gun control laws in the nation.

The Oregon Firearms Federation and Sherman County Sheriff Brad Lohrey filed the lawsuit Friday in U.S. District Court contending the measure scheduled to take effect Dec. 8 is unconstitutional because it violates the Second Amendment right to “keep and bear arms.”
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-21-2022, 7:07 AM
tedw tedw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 93
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Oregon Measure 114 Judge

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
RECAP link to complaint https://t.co/wyupagv4VA



Compare to the original Duncan complaint, http://michellawyers.com/wp-content/..._Complaint.pdf

https://ord.uscourts.gov/index.php/c.../judge-hallman

It's interesting to note that this case will be heard by a part-time Federal Magistrate.You can see his resume at the above link. I assume the Oregon Firearms Federation attorneys know what they are doing.

Unfortunately, the results you get may depend a lot on the Judge you get. Hopefully, they did their shopping wisely.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-21-2022, 11:22 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 43,448
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tedw View Post
https://ord.uscourts.gov/index.php/c.../judge-hallman

It's interesting to note that this case will be heard by a part-time Federal Magistrate.You can see his resume at the above link. I assume the Oregon Firearms Federation attorneys know what they are doing.

Unfortunately, the results you get may depend a lot on the Judge you get. Hopefully, they did their shopping wisely.
Wikipedia says
Quote:
In United States federal courts, magistrate judges are judges appointed to assist U.S. district court judges in the performance of their duties. Magistrate judges generally oversee first appearances of criminal defendants, set bail, and conduct other administrative duties.
Maybe Hallman does administrivia before the case gets assigned to a trial judge.

https://ballotpedia.org/Andrew_Hallman
Quote:
Hallman obtained a B.S. in political science from the University of Oregon in 2004 and a J.D. from the University of Oregon School of Law in 2008
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-21-2022, 11:30 AM
Milsurp1's Avatar
Milsurp1 Milsurp1 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Not in California
Posts: 3,072
iTrader: 32 / 100%
Default

In federal court the magistrates help the Article III judges with the workload. Often times they evaluate pending motions and make a report and recommendation to the Article III judge.

Because of the US Constitution only Art III judges can make the actual decisions unless the parties stipulate to a magistrate making the rulings.

Magistrates are not appointed for life as Art III judges are, but have still been quite good in my experience.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-21-2022, 11:50 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 43,448
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

Update from Friday - assigned to Judge Karin Immergut - https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...&order_by=desc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karin_Immergut

Trump appointee in 2019.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-21-2022, 1:29 PM
skilletboy's Avatar
skilletboy skilletboy is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: GP, OR, State of Jefferson
Posts: 2,190
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
It seems that the permit to purchase provisions cannot go into effect until a bunch of infrastructure is in place, and that cannot happen until the legislature appropriates money for that stuff.

If one cannot actually comply, one cannot rationally (sorry, I do remember this is gun law) be prosecuted for non-compliance, so there is no one who has standing, right?

Besides that, 'official' notice that it passed was Thursday the 17th. Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
There seemed to be some confusion from what I saw as to when this law and the new licensing scheme goes into effect. Some thought 30 days after it's voted on... some thought the 1st of the year?

But you're right, until someone actually even goes through this process they haven't actually been affected yet. I predict there will be a TON of people that won't even have access to, or reasonable access to be able to get the license.

This whole thing is a S-Show.
__________________
Quote:
"If the American people come to believe that the government is no longer constrained by the law then they will conclude that neither are they." - Michael Cannon, Cato Inst. 2014
_________________________________________


Last edited by skilletboy; 11-21-2022 at 1:33 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 11-21-2022, 2:02 PM
skilletboy's Avatar
skilletboy skilletboy is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: GP, OR, State of Jefferson
Posts: 2,190
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

It will probably make it nearly impossible for many rural residents to buy a new firearm for many months. Imagine you live 2+ hours from the nearest LE agency. Are they even going to have to resources and a plan ready, and the manpower to process these checks? If they do, it'll probably be very limited hours only on very limited days. Maybe appointment only? This is gonna be a major PITA.

The greater concern is in the interim while this is getting sorted out... what's gonna happen to all the (especially smaller) FFLs that depend on regular sales to stay open? And if they have to close will they reopen after all this?

Part of me feels like this was planned this way to be so convoluted, they knew this couldn't be implemented quickly and it was halt much of the sales for months and possibly shut down a significant number of FFLs in the process.
__________________
Quote:
"If the American people come to believe that the government is no longer constrained by the law then they will conclude that neither are they." - Michael Cannon, Cato Inst. 2014
_________________________________________


Last edited by skilletboy; 11-21-2022 at 2:08 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-21-2022, 3:07 PM
FISHNFRANK FISHNFRANK is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fullerton/Palomar Mtn
Posts: 1,194
iTrader: 28 / 100%
Default

I would imagine a judge will stay this the first day it goes into effect. Portland is a cancer in that states behind, much like LA or SF here.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-21-2022, 4:15 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 3,474
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHNFRANK View Post
I would imagine a judge will stay this the first day it goes into effect. Portland is a cancer in that states behind, much like LA or SF here.
At least one law suit has been filed where one of the plaintiffs is an Oregon Sheriff (for all of you who like to bash LE for being on the other side). IMHO M114 will explode on the launch pad and never get off of the ground. Could be wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-21-2022, 9:03 PM
Dan_Eastvale's Avatar
Dan_Eastvale Dan_Eastvale is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 6,119
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Either it’s stayed or goes into effect?
What do FFLs do?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-21-2022, 10:57 PM
BAJ475's Avatar
BAJ475 BAJ475 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kootenai County Idaho (Hayden)
Posts: 3,474
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_Eastvale View Post
Either it’s stayed or goes into effect?
What do FFLs do?
Wait to find out which way it goes. Hopefully, they will not have to wait for more than a couple of days and will have an answer before this BS is scheduled to take effect. One question, who could be found liable for the damages caused by this BS measure. My guess it will not be the sponsors of this BS measure. What the Oregon gun community needs is some extra judicial Henry Bowman action to make sure those who act to deny Oregon guns owners their rights pay the price for their actions.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-22-2022, 10:44 AM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 4,099
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Well, since no one has a definitive answer, the number of background checks has, relatively speaking, skyrocketed... Can Oregonians buy guns while Measure 114 limits are being worked out?

Quote:
...That has translated to an increased state police backlog in processing the requested background checks and customers waiting longer to walk out of a store with a firearm, according to state police and gun shop owners.

The number of people waiting for state police approval on background checks also has doubled in the last two weeks, from 10,000 to about 20,000, as voters cast ballots on one of the nation’s strictest gun control measures...
You do have to reflect on how those who or are associated with who created the mess are now trying to pass the buck for the problems...

Quote:
...Liz McKanna, a member of the legislative committee for the Lift Every Voice Oregon campaign, said it’s now up to the state police and others to “do everything they can” to get a permit-to-purchase program in place as is reasonably possible.

Regardless, she and Measure 114′s chief petitioners said they anticipate a legislative workgroup will be formed to clear up details that still need to be addressed, and would hope the governor could step in to delay the date the new law takes effect or, if not, at least delay the date that certain provisions of the measure can be “implemented,” if needed.

Gov. Kate Brown’s spokesperson said the governor doesn’t have the authority to extend the date the measure takes effect...
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-23-2022, 1:14 AM
tedw tedw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 93
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Trump appointee

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
Update from Friday - assigned to Judge Karin Immergut - https://www.courtlistener.com/docket...&order_by=desc

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karin_Immergut

Trump appointee in 2019.
Thanks . Former democrat I notice. Hopefully, Trump scrutinized her.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-23-2022, 2:17 AM
tedw tedw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 93
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Measure 114

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
It seems that the permit to purchase provisions cannot go into effect until a bunch of infrastructure is in place, and that cannot happen until the legislature appropriates money for that stuff.

If one cannot actually comply, one cannot rationally (sorry, I do remember this is gun law) be prosecuted for non-compliance, so there is no one who has standing, right?

Besides that, 'official' notice that it passed was Thursday the 17th. Are we there yet? Are we there yet?
Unless the Federal Court issues an injunction, gun sales as a practical matter will stop.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-24-2022, 7:48 AM
Jimi Jah's Avatar
Jimi Jah Jimi Jah is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: North San Diego County
Posts: 16,084
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

What will Portland rioters do now?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-24-2022, 11:07 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cottage Grove, OR
Posts: 43,448
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Default

A tweet today
Quote:
OFF v. Brown (D. OR, Measure 114): Scheduling Order regarding Emergency Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Defendants' Response is due by 11/30/22 at Noon. No Reply permitted. Oral Argument is set for 12/2/22 at 10AM in Portland Courtroom 13A before Judge Karin J. Immergut.
12/8 is the 'announced' effective date of the law created by M114.

ETA the motion for injunction: https://s3.documentcloud.org/documen...injunction.pdf
__________________
When a Long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, Pursuing Invariably the Same Object, Evinces a Design to Reduce Them [I.E. the People] Under Absolute Despotism, It Is Their Right, It Is Their Duty, to Throw off Such Government, and to Provide New Guards for Their Future Security.”
– Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1776
"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

- Marcus Aurelius
Ann Althouse: “Begin with the hypothesis that what they did is what they wanted to do. If they postured that they wanted to do something else, regard that as a con. Work from there. The world will make much more sense.”

Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.




Last edited by Librarian; 11-24-2022 at 1:57 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 11-24-2022, 12:01 PM
curtisfong's Avatar
curtisfong curtisfong is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,705
iTrader: 12 / 100%
Default

"Keep portland conformist!"
__________________
The Rifle on the Wall

"“[S]cientific proof” of both gun-rights and gun-control theories “is very hard to get”; therefore, requiring “some substantial scientific proof to show that a [firearm] law will indeed substantially reduce crime and injury” is tantamount to applying strict scrutiny to, and almost certainly will lead to invalidation of, the law." - Kamala Harris

Lawyers and their Stockholm Syndrome
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-24-2022, 8:25 PM
CurlyDave CurlyDave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 202
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

So far, most of the issues have been from a consumer viewpoint.

As a small businessman (not in any way related to arms) I have a question about the negative effects on FFL holders in Oregon. When 114 goes into effect, and there is not even a mechanism to issue a permit, it seems to me that this will substantially effect the income of FFL holders.

Since there is clearly no historic analog to a "permit to acquire" and this was known at the time, is there any liability to FFL holders for their loss of income?
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-24-2022, 11:10 PM
CurlyDave CurlyDave is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 202
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tedw View Post
Unless the Federal Court issues an injunction, gun sales as a practical matter will stop.
Why wouldn't that fact alone give every FFL holder in Oregon standing? Their business and livelihood will be severely impacted.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-25-2022, 1:45 AM
TrappedinCalifornia's Avatar
TrappedinCalifornia TrappedinCalifornia is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: What Used to be a Great State
Posts: 4,099
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CurlyDave View Post
So far, most of the issues have been from a consumer viewpoint.

As a small businessman (not in any way related to arms) I have a question about the negative effects on FFL holders in Oregon. When 114 goes into effect, and there is not even a mechanism to issue a permit, it seems to me that this will substantially effect the income of FFL holders.

Since there is clearly no historic analog to a "permit to acquire" and this was known at the time, is there any liability to FFL holders for their loss of income?
First, this was not an act of the Legislature. It was a Ballot Initiative. For some background on the Initiative, see... Backers Of Oregon "Gun-Safety" Measure: IP 17 becomes Measure 114. This is why the discussion largely revolves around Constitutionality and not legislative immunity or legislative responsibility. The bottom line is who/what would be held responsible for the liability? If liability was assigned, what might that mean regarding future ballot initiatives on any subject?

Second, this was discussed in advance of the election. From 14 October... OREGON MEASURE 114 COULD HALT GUN SALES IN STATE FOR YEARS...

Quote:
...If it passes, its various provisions would go into effect in January. On a recent Howl for Wildlife podcast, Amy Patrick, the policy director for the Oregon Hunters Association (OHA), told Free Range American that it will take at least two years to stand up a permitting system for residents. There’s no grace period, which means FFL gun sales would simply stop until purchase permits could be issued, potentially putting gun shops out of business and preventing state residents from exercising their 2A rights...

Measure 114 began as Initiative Petition 17 (IP 17), which needed just 112,020 signatures to become a ballot initiative and get in front of every voter in the state. Since it’s not a bill, the requirements and timetables are comparatively loose.

“To be frank, I think that groups have found that it’s easier [to go this route], even with the need to collect signatures. It’s an easier route than the political fight in the legislature,” Patrick said. “Gun bills have come up every session, and it’s always a fight to try to protect ourselves there. So, I think these guys decided that it would be easier to go out to the public and […] get this on the ballot.”...

Patrick said that lawsuit challenges are already in the works if Measure 114 should pass, but the hope a judge might grant an injunction when a suit is presented that would allow gun sales to continue is cold comfort and no guarantee. However, the constitutionality of Measure 114 is extremely suspect, especially in light of the recent US Supreme Court Bruen decision, which disallowed any subjective criteria for firearms permitting or licensing...
There's a reason why many feel it represents the 'California attitude' infecting Oregon. Remember...



And he was referencing the California Legislature in relation to that statement.

Now, consider Oregon and Laws governing the initiative process in Oregon...

Quote:
...Oregon does not restrict the subject matter of ballot measures. In addition, measures are not required to specify a funding source for mandated expenditures.

See law: Oregon Constitution, Article IV, Section 1 and Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 250...

Last edited by TrappedinCalifornia; 11-25-2022 at 1:56 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-25-2022, 5:19 AM
Oxnard_Montalvo's Avatar
Oxnard_Montalvo Oxnard_Montalvo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: NorCal
Posts: 1,033
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHNFRANK View Post
I would imagine a judge will stay this the first day it goes into effect. Portland is a cancer in that states behind, much like LA or SF here.
Let's not overlook what happened to the voter approved proposition that [would have] banned gay marriage in california [voted in by the same voters who overwhelmingly voted for obama, figure that one out] which was a clear case of voter suppression that's all the rage because ONE JUDGE overturned ALL of their votes.

Can/will oregon do the same thing? I guess we'll see eh?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-25-2022, 7:35 AM
tedw tedw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 93
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Just about every Oregonian should have standing after Dec.8. You have to take a class which is not available to get your permit to buy a gun.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-25-2022, 7:58 AM
tedw tedw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 93
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default Preliminary Injunction appeal

Quote:
Originally Posted by FISHNFRANK View Post
I would imagine a judge will stay this the first day it goes into effect. Portland is a cancer in that states behind, much like LA or SF here.
If the preliminary injunction is granted, you can expect an immediate appeal to the 9th Circuit. If not granted, you can also expect an appeal.

So the 9th Circuit will be deciding whether there is any injunction.

If not stayed, where will Oregonians find the required class to even apply for a permit to purchase?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-25-2022, 9:45 AM
michaelh1951 michaelh1951 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 133
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

I have no sympathy for hunters. They don't oppose restrictive gun laws because they generally don't apply to hunting style guns.

Ditto for the cowboy action people. They opposed the California magazine limit until tubular magazines were exempted and then they fell obediently silent
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-29-2022, 3:28 AM
tedw tedw is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 93
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tedw View Post
If the preliminary injunction is granted, you can expect an immediate appeal to the 9th Circuit. If not granted, you can also expect an appeal.

So the 9th Circuit will be deciding whether there is any injunction.

If not stayed, where will Oregonians find the required class to even apply for a permit to purchase?
The Oregon voters have the power to vote away second amendment rights but NOT the right. If the District Court or the 9th circuit do not issue a preliminary injunction then Oregonians have this power and should use it:

Fauvre v. Roberts, 791 P.2d 128 (Or. 1990): The Supreme Court of Oregon held that jury nullification is “an acquittal in the face of evidence which would support a conviction, based upon the jurors’ assessment that the law under which the defendant is charged is unjust, the defendant is not blameworthy, or both.” The court found that under the present state of the law, a jury has Conaway et al.: the power, but not the right, to acquit a defendant when his or her guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Last edited by tedw; 11-29-2022 at 8:58 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-29-2022, 2:05 PM
TruOil TruOil is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 1,378
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oxnard_Montalvo View Post
Let's not overlook what happened to the voter approved proposition that [would have] banned gay marriage in california [voted in by the same voters who overwhelmingly voted for obama, figure that one out] which was a clear case of voter suppression that's all the rage because ONE JUDGE overturned ALL of their votes.

Can/will oregon do the same thing? I guess we'll see eh?
Initially, all challenges are decided by a single judge, there is no getting around that. If there is an appeal, then three judges or justices, then possibly 11 or more (en banc) and finally the Supreme Court (nine justices).
Overriding a ban of gay marriage wasn't a clear case of voter suppression since a majority vote cannot override a constitutional right. If that were the case, a national vote might just override the 2d Amendment, the 1st Amendment, the 5th Amendment, and so on because that right had fallen into disfavor.
Now there is a way to eliminate rights, by amending the Constitution, but that takes a LOT more than a simple majority.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 5:27 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2021, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.



Seams2SewBySusy